Exploring Michigan’s Unique University Board Election System

In Michigan, voters face a unique task when heading to the polls: selecting board members for the state’s public universities. Unlike most states, Michigan holds statewide elections for these positions, but only for three universities, each using a distinct title for their board members: Regents for the University of Michigan (U of M), Trustees for Michigan State University (MSU), and Governors for Wayne State University (WSU).

Michigan’s Unique Approach to University Governance

According to an MSU Extension article, Michigan is the only state where public university boards are elected through a statewide vote. In contrast, other states may have regional elections for similar positions.

The remaining ten public universities in Michigan have their boards appointed by the governor, a method more commonly seen in other states. This raises questions about why Michigan’s system is structured this way.

Historical Roots and Constitutional Basis

The reason for Michigan’s approach is rooted in the state Constitution, influenced by the principles of Jacksonian democracy. Eric Lupher, president of the Citizens Research Council, explains this in his 2018 article on the topic. He states, “Michigan’s propensity to rely on elections instead of appointment is lodged in Jacksonian democracy, which advanced the concept that the problem with government was the appointive status of government officials.” This system aimed to prevent the emergence of a “government aristocracy” by dispersing power and ensuring regular turnover of officials.

Why Only Three Universities?

The selection of U of M, MSU, and WSU as the three universities with elected boards seems to be historical and based on their status as “flagship” institutions. Lupher suggests that the choice of WSU, despite other universities sometimes having higher enrollment or research status, was ultimately decided by voters. WSU transitioned to a state university in 1956, and by 1959, a constitutional amendment allowed its board to be elected.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of the System

Lupher notes some challenges with the current system in his analysis. He remarks that the nomination process for these boards is controlled by major political parties through conventions that are not open to the public. Consequently, candidates often have strong ties to the universities and their key supporters, limiting the broader public’s influence in the nomination process.

Possibilities for Change

For those dissatisfied with Michigan’s approach, there are avenues for change. Voters could advocate for a constitutional amendment or participate in efforts to convene a constitutional convention. A recent legislative resolution proposed shifting all university board appointments to the governor, but it did not advance to the ballot.

Engaging with the Election Process

As elections approach, voters can research candidates nominated by political parties. Information about these candidates can be found on this page, and political donation tracking can provide further insights into their affiliations and support. Additionally, candidate forums, such as one hosted by the U of M Faculty Senate on September 24, offer opportunities for voters to learn more about the individuals vying for these influential roles.